Antiwar Speculation in a Bar

The Man He Killed

By Thomas Hardy

"Had he and I but met

           By some old ancient inn,

We should have sat us down to wet

           Right many a nipperkin!

           "But ranged as infantry,

           And staring face to face,

I shot at him as he at me,

           And killed him in his place.

           "I shot him dead because —

           Because he was my foe,

Just so: my foe of course he was;

           That's clear enough; although

           "He thought he'd 'list, perhaps,

           Off-hand like — just as I —

Was out of work — had sold his traps —

           No other reason why.

           "Yes; quaint and curious war is!

           You shoot a fellow down

You'd treat if met where any bar is,

           Or help to half-a-crown."

Most anti-war works will focus on more jarring images to scare viewers away from the brutality of war, flashbacks to combat, scenes of suspense and fear, witnessing friends die on the battlefield, but “The Man He Killed” is set as a calm remembrance. Instead of shocking the audience with imagery, it creates empathy with a soldier in his realising that he can’t justify the deaths he caused. “The Man He Killed” is an effective anti-war poem because of the choice of first-person point of view, the wording used to show his realisation, and the casual setting mixed with an increasingly concerned tone.

As this poem is written in first-person point of view, it creates a closer connection to the events of war and puts more emotion into the analysis of the meaning behind fighting. Generally, people who are against war would not fight in one. They will have justification for causing death and believe in what they are doing. However, here is a man, who some time after fighting, is troubled by how he would just kill someone because they were not on his side. Also, first person gives credibility to the trauma experienced, as well as adding an emotional impact to the retelling. The emotion added helps the reader connect to his story of something they have not likely experienced, allowing them to realise the negative impacts of war.

The wording throughout this poem shows both the status of the man, helping readers relate to him, and his thought process through his realisation. As he begins to justify his killing another, he begins to repeat himself, as if stalling and restarting in trying to come up with an idea. “I shot him dead because-because he was my foe.” And yet, even after saying this, he can’t find enough reason. He knows that he was supposed to kill the other man because that is what you do in war, but then he shows doubt by finishing the third stanza with “although.” Also, through use of abbreviations like “You’d” or colloquialisms such as “Off-hand-like” the man is made to be a common citizen. This relates him to the audience by putting him in the same social standing and creating more concern when he begins to become troubled by his actions.

It can be assumed by his conclusion at the end and his casual speech that the veteran is speaking to another about his time at war in a bar. He has most likely recounted this to multiple people, yet this time he is trying to justify his actions. Because the setting is not a place where the man is revealing to say a therapist or journalist about all of the details about his life, he is not guarded about what he is thinking about or saying. Also, assuming he has been drinking a bit, he is saying everything that comes to mind. However, during his stream of conscious he discovers a bump when he tries to talk about why he killed people. As his tone continues to become more concerned and anxious, the reader begins to develop more empathy for him. He was just sitting down to think about his life, but now he has discovered a moral dilemma about his past actions. This is effective in pushing a theme of anti-war as it shows how fighting can impact a soldier long after battle, even when spending a night at a bar trying to do nothing.

“The Man He Killed” is a very powerful poem. Though the setting is casual and the speaker average, the realisation he makes and the fashion that he does so draw the audience to take his place and feel his pain in not being able to justify terrible actions from his past. This becomes a very effective piece in speaking against war, because through drawing in the audience’s empathy, Hardy can effectively argue how the man would have just as likely become friendly with any of the men he murdered. He also makes it clear how the man is not unlike those he murdered, further pushing the idea of antiwar into the question of does one person’s death really have a large change in war, while it means everything to them.